Hydrostatic vs Non

/ Hydrostatic vs Non #41  
I've run HST's for years and never had a pump starve of fluid because of operating on a slope. If you worry about this, you should also worry about the engine oil pump starving of oil on a simular slope. I worked [ back when I worked ] with a fellow electrician that burnt up a JD left idling on a slope years ago. Also, if the HST was starving, the FEL/3pt operation would probably be effected, too. I don't ever remember that happening, either... So, you can probably mark that off your HST minus side of the list.... :)
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #42  
The problem with the whole hydro vs gear argument is hydro vs what gear type. Power Shuttle has all the advantages of gear and tge advantages of HST, but is nearly as much money as HST, and seems to be limited to ~35+hp tractors. When people say hydro only.for loader, they often are thinking that the only gear tractors are the plain "clutch and hunt for gear" types.

Well said...
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #43  
My two cents worth if even that is I love my HST for FEL work but I prefer my gear drive for mowing since I don't do a lot of backing up. I understand that some HST have cruise control (mine doesn't) and that might be ok for long stretches of constant speed work. Yes there is a bit of extra oil changing and filters that in the long run is not that significant of an outlay ($400 for 50 hour service as most folks report) that isn't required on gear. If you are buying used and that has been done, then not a lot of difference in scheduled maintenance. I have one gear drive and one HST and my go to tractor is the one with HST because of its easy operation and smaller size. Even though the HST B26 doesn't have a cab not AC, I do most of my work with it except mowing the pasture which is only a twice yearly exercise and the occasional heavy lift job that is best done with the larger tractor. I no longer have the constant need for the larger HP like I did when I first bought my place so now I may burn 1 tank of fuel (25 gallons) per year whereas I will burn 4 times that with my little B26.
If I had to buy again, it would definitely be the HST transmission including the whining transmission which I don't find that an issue and loss of 5% power is not an issue either as I rarely use the full engine HP anyway. If it spins the tires (all 4) then I don't need any more engine HP and my HST will do that in all but High range. One thing beginners need to know about HST is that less extension of the foot pedal=slower speed but more power. You have to get out of the pedal to the metal mindset when using HST. Backing off the HST pedal and plenty of throttle WILL slow your travel speed but allow you to climb that hill in high range without down shifting.
A bit off topic, but many folks here on TBN have complained about their HST stalling on hills and keeping the pedal to the medal is what is causing their problem, just backing off the pedal is the solution. I learned this with my Kubota RTV 900 long before I got my B26 HST and they both work basically the same way.
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #44  
The common dilemma of a hydrostatic vs. manual transmission on a hilly three acre field, is one that the more I research,
the more confused I become. I have a John Deere D110 that's about two years old. After about thirty minutes it won't climb
the hills, and literally flies down the hills. I don't know if I can make it through another mowing season; and hesitate to spend
two grand or more on another hydro. Please advise.
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #45  
When did you last change out the HST filter? I write date of change on cartridge with a China marking wax pencil.
 
Last edited:
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #46  
The common dilemma of a hydrostatic vs. manual transmission on a hilly three acre field, is one that the more I research,
the more confused I become. I have a John Deere D110 that's about two years old. After about thirty minutes it won't climb
the hills, and literally flies down the hills. I don't know if I can make it through another mowing season; and hesitate to spend
two grand or more on another hydro. Please advise.

Ah yes, the old tuff torque non serviceable hydro problem. you will want to read this thread and plan your path. Good luck.

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/parts-repairs/164892-tufftorq-k46-repair-guide-pictures.html
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #47  
As far as the advantages of a hydro over a gear, think of the letter "L": 1), Loader work, 2) Lawn-mowing, 3) Landscaping, 4) Lazy folks, 5) Ladies. If you and your usage falls mainly into these areas, then the hydro is best for you, otherwise, take advantage of the 6-15% more horsepower, and lower purchase and maintenance cost of the gear transmission.
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #48  
This may sound stupid but the reason I like standard is because of my height. My long legs are always being jammed into vehicles that don't have sufficient leg-room. Car, truck whatever - my legs are always stuck in this bent position between the back of the seat and the gas pedal.
It's nice to shift into a gear and just put my feet flat on the floor for a while.
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #49  
This may sound stupid but the reason I like standard is because of my height. My long legs are always being jammed into vehicles that don't have sufficient leg-room. Car, truck whatever - my legs are always stuck in this bent position between the back of the seat and the gas pedal.
It's nice to shift into a gear and just put my feet flat on the floor for a while.

That's what they make cruise control for :)
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #50  
I don't like hydro transmissions at all!

But that doesn't mean they are bad. Both types are good!

"shuttle shift" is forward/reverse without clutching, otherwise a gear drive and a good choice.

Buy what ya like.
With a gear drive when you shuttle forward to reverse, don't you have to come to a stop and step on the clutch?
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #51  
With a gear drive when you shuttle forward to reverse, don't you have to come to a stop and step on the clutch?

It depends on the shuttle.. some hydraulic shuttles require no clutching and you shift on the go.. example Kubota Glide shift.

Others you still have to clutch and stop. The advantage of the shuttle here is it allows you to remain in the same gear for forward and reverse.. so your reverse speed will be the same as your forward speed.. but it still wears your left leg out.
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #52  
Yep, there is standard shuttle and various makes of power shuttle. Power shuttle is just flip the lever on the steering column from forward to reverse. Standard shuttle is where you still press the clutch.
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #53  
With a gear drive when you shuttle forward to reverse, don't you have to come to a stop and step on the clutch?
Most shuttle shifts you need to clutch to forward/reverse.
With a power shift or glide shift you can forward/reverse without the clutch.
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #54  
I really like the "power-reverser" that JD uses on their gear tractors. I even find it more efficient than a hydro for doing loader work. My JD "power reverser" tractor has 12 speeds, split into three ranges (A, B, and C). I find that I can maximize loader efficiency by operating the tractor in 9th gear (1st in the "C" range), and the dash throttle set at minimum. That 9th gear is usually just right for transport, where speed can be controlled with the foot throttle. Just prior to stabbing into the dirt or other material pile, I downshift into the "A" range. That puts the tractor into 1st gear, where it's maximum power can be obtained when it is really needed (along with maximum foot throttle if necessary). If I need to cross some rough terrain, I shift into the "B" range, which puts the tractor into 5th gear (just right for crossing ditches, etc.).

This method really simplifies the loader-work task, by only requiring the operation of a single lever with the left hand (no touching of the gear-shift lever, just the range selector). Anyone who has done any loader work will know that there is always one hand available for tasks, while the other is on the steering wheel, so only needing to mess with one left-hand lever is a huge plus.

Prior to, or shortly after backing out of the pile, the tractor is shifted back into the "C" range for transport at optimum efficiency. I do use the clutch for those C range - A range / A-range - C-range shifts, but I am not sure it would be necessary, because the left foot is not busy then anyhow.

I have finally learned how to optimally operate this tractor for loader work but, it's primary function is bush-hogging, plowing and disking, all of which are performed, at various gears, in the "B" range. All of these tasks may require the tractor's maximum available pto and drawbar hp at times. Also, these operations are all best performed at a constant speed which make it no contest, in favor of the gear tractor. I never use the other gears available in the "A" range and the only time I use other gears in the "C" range, is the top (12th), for road transport.

The main reason that this JD gear tractor is more efficient than a hydro, for loader work, is the hydro carries with it a 6 - 15% deduction in available drawbar horsepower. That means that less available power for putting into a pile, a time when all of the tractor's available power and traction may be called upon. Normally, the hydro shines here by providing the optimum speed at all times. I need all the power I can get because my tractor is the lowest powered of it's particular class of JD tractors. I always have had plenty however, and have often wondered why folks fork out all that extra cash for the higher powered machines. I guess a lot of them are making up for the hydro deduction, or perhaps, the extra power needed to run an air-conditioned cab.

The one place that I definitely recognize the superiority of a hydro is for lawn-mowing. I used one of them for a few years. It had the same engine hp and several inches narrower cut than the gear tractor that I use now, yet could always get the lawn cut in considerably less time. Right now, I am shopping for a hydro, zero turn mower, which should solve that problem.
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #55  
Today I was out using my gear transmission skid steer - wait - nobody makes a gear drive skid steer. Wonder why since their primary use is as a loader?
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #56  
As far as the advantages of a hydro over a gear, think of the letter "L": 1), Loader work, 2) Lawn-mowing, 3) Landscaping, 4) Lazy folks, 5) Ladies. If you and your usage falls mainly into these areas, then the hydro is best for you, otherwise, take advantage of the 6-15% more horsepower, and lower purchase and maintenance cost of the gear transmission.

Lol!!! #4! Lol!!!!
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #57  
This may sound stupid but the reason I like standard is because of my height. My long legs are always being jammed into vehicles that don't have sufficient leg-room. Car, truck whatever - my legs are always stuck in this bent position between the back of the seat and the gas pedal.
It's nice to shift into a gear and just put my feet flat on the floor for a while.

It dosnt sound stupid to me. Being tall and having bad knees and a problem with the right ankle from an old injury. In my recent search for a new machine I actually felt much more comfortable on many of the 30 to 40 HP machines in gear rather than the hydro. The one machine that seemed to shine in leg comfort for me was the DK40se HST which was actually a little bigger than I anticipated on buying but in the long run priced out right and should be a long time keeper that both me and the wife can use. If I couldn't have gotten a good deal on this machine I probably would have ended up with a gear drive rather than a hydro and just kept the old JD hydro for her occasional use. Like some here who are very proficient with a gear, I also am and have no problems doing any type work with one providing the range of gears is sufficient. By the way if it wasn't for a raised seat on my JD I would have been uncomfortable on it as well. Sometimes a little modification can go a long way.
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #58  
I really like the "power-reverser" that JD uses on their gear tractors. I even find it more efficient than a hydro for doing loader work. My JD "power reverser" tractor has 12 speeds, split into three ranges (A, B, and C). I find that I can maximize loader efficiency by operating the tractor in 9th gear (1st in the "C" range), and the dash throttle set at minimum. That 9th gear is usually just right for transport, where speed can be controlled with the foot throttle. Just prior to stabbing into the dirt or other material pile, I downshift into the "A" range. That puts the tractor into 1st gear, where it's maximum power can be obtained when it is really needed (along with maximum foot throttle if necessary). If I need to cross some rough terrain, I shift into the "B" range, which puts the tractor into 5th gear (just right for crossing ditches, etc.).

This method really simplifies the loader-work task, by only requiring the operation of a single lever with the left hand (no touching of the gear-shift lever, just the range selector). Anyone who has done any loader work will know that there is always one hand available for tasks, while the other is on the steering wheel, so only needing to mess with one left-hand lever is a huge plus.

Prior to, or shortly after backing out of the pile, the tractor is shifted back into the "C" range for transport at optimum efficiency. I do use the clutch for those C range - A range / A-range - C-range shifts, but I am not sure it would be necessary, because the left foot is not busy then anyhow.

I have finally learned how to optimally operate this tractor for loader work but, it's primary function is bush-hogging, plowing and disking, all of which are performed, at various gears, in the "B" range. All of these tasks may require the tractor's maximum available pto and drawbar hp at times. Also, these operations are all best performed at a constant speed which make it no contest, in favor of the gear tractor. I never use the other gears available in the "A" range and the only time I use other gears in the "C" range, is the top (12th), for road transport.

The main reason that this JD gear tractor is more efficient than a hydro, for loader work, is the hydro carries with it a 6 - 15% deduction in available drawbar horsepower. That means that less available power for putting into a pile, a time when all of the tractor's available power and traction may be called upon. Normally, the hydro shines here by providing the optimum speed at all times. I need all the power I can get because my tractor is the lowest powered of it's particular class of JD tractors. I always have had plenty however, and have often wondered why folks fork out all that extra cash for the higher powered machines. I guess a lot of them are making up for the hydro deduction, or perhaps, the extra power needed to run an air-conditioned cab.

The one place that I definitely recognize the superiority of a hydro is for lawn-mowing. I used one of them for a few years. It had the same engine hp and several inches narrower cut than the gear tractor that I use now, yet could always get the lawn cut in considerably less time. Right now, I am shopping for a hydro, zero turn mower, which should solve that problem.

Much of what you describe for loader work can now be done with the newer HST setups without the need to change ranges....they do it for you.

Also, many of them have setting for constant ground speed, and most also have cruise control, which accomplishes much the same thing.

I totally don't get your comment about needing all the machine's available power when digging into the pile....I can fill my bucket completely without using even close to it's available power and traction.

I have both hydro and gear machines, so I'm not against either type, but for the average weekend warrior, it's almost no contest....they'll be more efficient, and happier with a hydro. After reading a lot of comments, I'm convinced that a many of the people who say they prefer gear have never actually owned, or used, something similar with a hydro tranny.

Not that you mentioned it, but when I see people claim an HST setup will cost more in maintenance over the long haul I have to sort of chuckle....if filters and fluid every couple of years is a big deal, I guess I'm not that cheap. On the other hand it seems like more machines get new clutches than rebuilt hydros over time.
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #59  
Today I was out using my gear transmission skid steer - wait - nobody makes a gear drive skid steer. Wonder why since their primary use is as a loader?

HAHA! Thumbs up! :D
 
/ Hydrostatic vs Non #60  
Much of what you describe for loader work can now be done with the newer HST setups without the need to change ranges....they do it for you.

Also, many of them have setting for constant ground speed, and most also have cruise control, which accomplishes much the same thing.

I totally don't get your comment about needing all the machine's available power when digging into the pile....I can fill my bucket completely without using even close to it's available power and traction.

I have both hydro and gear machines, so I'm not against either type, but for the average weekend warrior, it's almost no contest....they'll be more efficient, and happier with a hydro. After reading a lot of comments, I'm convinced that a many of the people who say they prefer gear have never actually owned, or used, something similar with a hydro tranny.

Not that you mentioned it, but when I see people claim an HST setup will cost more in maintenance over the long haul I have to sort of chuckle....if filters and fluid every couple of years is a big deal, I guess I'm not that cheap. On the other hand it seems like more machines get new clutches than rebuilt hydros over time.


Most people who don't like the hydro have never had a tractor with it for any length of time. I agree with Gman in the above post.
 

Marketplace Items

GMC 2500HD 4wd Service Truck (A61306)
GMC 2500HD 4wd...
ALAMO A84-84" HEAVY DUTY BRUSH CUTTER (A60430)
ALAMO A84-84"...
WAREHOUSE STEPS (A60432)
WAREHOUSE STEPS...
(2) NOS-8 LUG- 7000Ib 74SC-93 HUB FACE DROP AXLES (A60432)
(2) NOS-8 LUG-...
5ft Pull-Behind Rotary Tiller Tractor Attachment (A59228)
5ft Pull-Behind...
2014 F-150 STX (A56438)
2014 F-150 STX...
 
Top